World Rugby has concluded “discrepancies around process and communication” led to Australia’s Nic White wrongly being allowed to continue playing after suffering a head injury in his side’s 13-10 defeat to Ireland.
Wallabies scrum-half White was visibly unsteady on his feet following a tackle on Mack Hansen and an accidental collision with Josh Van Der Flier’s boot in the second half of the Dublin Test on November 19.
The former Exeter player passed a head injury assessment before completing the full 80 minutes at the Aviva Stadium but an independent review has ruled he should have been taken off.
The investigation attributed the mistake to medics missing crucial footage of a dazed, stumbling White because they were busy reviewing the initial tackle.
Concussion campaign group Progressive Rugby and television spectators were among those angered by the events.
White, 32, was subsequently stood down for 12 days, resulting in him being absent on Saturday for his country’s 39-34 win over Wales in Cardiff.
World Rugby reaffirmed its commitment to the “highest-possible standards of care for all players” as it detailed findings of the review.
“The event involved two separate incidents,” read a statement from the governing body.
“Given the facts and footage available, it was defensible for the medical team to remove Nic White for an HIA after the first incident.
“The second incident resulted in criteria one signs according to the World Rugby HIA process, which should have resulted in White’s permanent removal from the field.
“Both the independent match day doctor and team doctor were in the process of reviewing video footage for the first incident when the second occurred.
“The second incident was not communicated to either doctor and therefore, in performing White’s HIA, (they) did not review any additional footage.
“Having been made aware of the second incident after the game, both doctors reviewed the footage and declared a criteria one diagnosis
“Discrepancies around process and communication, rather than interpretation of player signs, were therefore the key factors to affect this particular HIA process.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here